Monday, December 23, 2013

Everybody Wants to Change Malaysia but Nobody Wants to Change Himself

Merdeka Center reported on 22nd December
2013 that Prime Minister Najib’s approval rating of 52% is an all-time low compared
to the 65% when he launched the New Economic Model (“NEM”). The NEM was a
response to Anwar Ibrahim’s New Economic Agenda replacing affirmative action
based on race with one based on needs.

After two pre-election budgets when Christmas came
early, the post-election budget has turned Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak from
Santa Claus to the Grinch that stole Christmas.

Many (the 51% that voted Pakatan Rakyat) seek solace
from the crippling price hikes in the thought that economic hardship will knock
some sense into those who retained BN in power (the 43% including the newly
minted voters of foreign origins) to mend the error of their ways in the next
General Elections. I was also of the same mind until I read the words printed
on my son’s T-shirt:

“Everybody wants to change the world but nobody
wants to change himself”

This, I discovered, is a quote by Leo Tolstoy,
author of “War and Peace” and “Anna Karenina”. His book, “The Kingdom of God Is
Within You” and idea of non-violent resistance have been acknowledged by
Mohandas Gandhi and Dr Martin Luther King Jr. to have inspired and influenced
them in their struggle against oppression.

This quote struck me that no matter how bad the
economy is going to be, we are not going to change Malaysia, not the next GE
and the GEs to come, if we, Malaysians, do not first change ourselves. We cannot hope for a multicultural and
equitable society, if we do not first get rid of the racial prejudices within
us.

We have never been one Malaysia, we have as many
different Malaysia as there are ethnic groups, each living separate lives. Each
group has no real idea how the others live. Malaysians have been separated and
segregated in a manner that discourages peoples of different ethnicity to
interact with each other in a meaningful and positive way. Fifty-six years of racial
politics has poisoned, dehumanized and desensitized us. We cannot remove BN, if
we cannot remove the fear and ignorance UMNO instilled in the 47%. We cannot remove the fear and ignorance, if we
cannot remove the prejudices, preconceptions and preconditions in us. To do so we
must firstly know how ethnicity is used, organized and structured by UMNO to
mobilize political support. The events this December is instructive.

As leaders of the world gathered in South Africa to
pay homage to Nelson Mandela who fought racial discrimination, leaders of UMNO gathered
in Malaysia to pay homage to Ketuanan Melayu. The unkindest cut to Nelson
Mandela’s memory is the shameless comparison in likening UMNO’s Ketuanan Melayu
to Mandela’s struggle against apartheid. As Tengku Adnan said playing the race card at
BN party meetings are normal.

The UMNO General Assembly is the annual tribal gathering
for ritual racial diatribe, ethnic histrionics and minority bashing. It is the yearly
affirmation of historical legacies of mistrust, the reinforcement of the
mentality of victimization and the propping up of feelings of shared
deprivation.

At last year’s assembly, Tokyo UMNO club
representative, Ariff Yassir Zulkafli sang “Lagu Warisan” the lyrics translated
to English is as follows:

“A
small child plays with fire

A
desolate heart burns

Tears,
blood and sweat (yet)

His
land belongs to outsiders”

It is the signature song of Malay patriots yearning
for a return to the Malay motherland free of pendatang. The song became the
emotional and psychological high point of the assembly bringing tears to the
delegates who joined in spontaneous rendition. But nothing is comparable to Hishamuddin
Hussein Onn brandishing his keris to cries from the delegates not to just wave
it but to use it.

Dr Lim Teck Ghee has observed that “Lagu Warisan”
and the keris waving encapsulates the UMNO mind and mentality in propagating
the doctrine of “Blood and Soil” nationalism. Blood and soil nationalism refers
to an ideology that focuses on ethnicity based on two factors- descent and
homeland.

David A. Lakefield and Donald Rothchild in “Containing
Fear: Origins and Management of Ethnic Conflict” said competition for resources
lies at the heart of ethnicity. Property rights, jobs, scholarships,
educational admissions, language rights, government contracts and development
allocations all confer benefits on individuals. All such resources are scarce
and thus, become objects of competition. Where ethnicity becomes the basis for
identity, group competition becomes a struggle along ethnic lines. Politics
matter because the state controls access to scarce resources. Groups that
possess political power gain privileged access to goods and benefits. The
groups struggling for political power compete on their visions of just,
legitimate and appropriate political orders.

John M.
Richardson and Shinjini Sen in “Ethnic Conflict and Economic Development”
explained that in a typical scenario, leaders of a dominant ethnic group gain
office and then use state institutions to distribute economic and political
benefits preferentially to their ethnic brethren. Discrimination against
subordinate groups, often portrayed as less deserving human beings, accompanies
this preferential treatment. When force is needed to impose discriminatory
practices and quell subordinate group resistance, it is exercised by police
officers and soldiers recruited almost exclusively from the dominant group, who
often view themselves as “ethnic soldiers”. In democracies, a dominant group
that is a majority often uses its voting power to entrench discriminatory
practices by legal or quasi legal means. When a dominant group is the minority,
it typically imposes discriminatory policies by force as in apartheid South
Africa.

Historical legacies of mistrust, a mentality of
victimization and feelings of shared deprivation make group members more receptive
to simplistic appeals from extremist leaders and encourage those vying to be
leaders to make such appeals.

Nelson Mandela and FW de Klerk in South Africa have
shown how courageous leadership can reduce ethnic tensions. Unfortunately,
political leaders in a diverse society more often than not are less courageous.
Such political leaders play a divisive role by appealing to ethnic sentiments
and use rival groups as scape-goats in order to enhance personal political
power and win or retain political office.

Historical legacies of mistrust are used to kindle
and stoke present day fires based on memories of “ancient hatreds”. In the
Middle East, ethnic differences are traced to biblical times. In Northern
Ireland, historical clashes between Protestants and Catholics are relived in
annual festivals that often become violent. Sri Lanka school children are reminded
of the pivotal clash between Sinhalese Prince Dutugemunu and Tamil King Elaric
that re-established Singhalese dominance on the island. For Serbians and
Croatians, the incursions into Europe of Ottoman Sultans are a living reality
along with the ethnically divisive policies of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and
the atrocities instigated by ethnic based regimes.

A victim mentality helps to unite group members
behind their leaders and justifies present sacrifices. Moreover, members of a
victimized group feel justified in victimizing others. In South Africa, white
Afrikaners viewed themselves as victims of British colonialism redeemed by
ruling over the inferior Blacks, Indians and Coloreds. In Sri Lanka, Sinhalese
majority also viewed themselves as victims. They resented the favorable
treatment given to Tamils under colonial rule. In the words of world historian
K.M. de Silva, the Sinhalese were a “majority with a minority complex”. This
attitude fueled political support for Sinhalese nationalist leaders whose policies
convinced many Tamils there was no alternative to secession ending in a
disastrous tragedy for all.

Relative deprivation is a perception that due to the
historical legacies of mistrust and victimization mentality, the members of the
group believe they are not being provided the benefits to which they are justly
entitled. Feelings of relative deprivation are intensified not only when
benefits including political, religious and language rights as well as economic
well-being decline but also when expectations increase. Feelings of deprivation
resulting from declining benefits or unrealized expectations will be
interpreted as an ethnically motivated injustice. It is this relative
deprivation that justifies the ethnically motivated leader to re-establish a “more
equitable social-economic order”. In Sri Lanka, both S.W.R.D. and Sirimavo
Bandaranaike won democratic elections by appealing to Buddhist-Sinhalese
nationalist sentiments and denigrating ethnic Tamils. In the United States,
appealing to white racist sentiments is a staple of political campaigning in
racially divided Southern states. Similar tactics were used by leaders such as
Slobodan Milosevic, of Serbia and General Tudjman of Croatia who won their
presidencies by appealing to the most divisive aspects of Serbian and Croatian
nationalism.

John M Richardson and Shinjini Sen were referring to
Rwanda, Serbia, Croatia, Sri Lanka and Ethiopia but Malaysians will easily
recognized the same things are happening in Malaysia.

On 14 September 2013, Prime Minister Najib reversed
the NEM following pressure from right wing extremist group Perkasa, to launch
the Bumiputra Economic Empowerment Programmes. Najib’s experiment in moderate
politics ended when he declared:

“Therefore,
the Malays and Bumiputras as the core of the national agenda could not be
denied by anybody, indeed, any matter which is national in nature, which does
not take into account or neglect the agenda of the Malays and Bumiputras is not
fair and just”

“…[for]
the support given by Malays and Bumiputras at the 13th General
Election recently, today the government decides to make a big shift to
implement concrete and total strategies and approaches.”

“...
All these we undertake to look after the lot of the Malay and Bumiputra
communities, since the past, presently and forever.”

David A. Lake and Donald Rothchild said ethnic conflict
is most often caused by collective “fears of the future, lived through the
past”. They suggest it is important to reassure the different groups of both
their physical and cultural security by demonstrations of respect and
confidence building measures. In Malaysia there is no chance of this happening because
we are not dealing with just individual racism but also institutional racism.

Administrative officers often are at the very least
sympathetic to the UMNO cause. The close relationship between the bureaucracy
and the party date back to UMNO’s founding. In the 1955 elections, 80% of the
UMNO candidates were former officials of the civil service. Of the seven Malays
in Tunku Abdul Rahman’s cabinet, six were former civil servants. Based on
complains received, the Birotata Negara civics course train graduates to implement
racists and religious discriminating policies. In the Mid-Term Review of the
Ninth Malaysia Plan, it is reported that 1,016,749 participants benefitted from
the BTN programmes.

Those who viewed the “Listen, Listen, Listen” video
will note the majority of the students applauded Suara Wanita 1Malaysia
president, Sharifah Zohra Jabeen Syed Shah Miskin’s castigation of Bawani, the
lone objector to Sharifah’s arguments. The others, Bawani said, were too
fearful to stand up and speak out for their rights.

To counter ethnic politics, right thinking
Malaysians must break the chains of fear and ignorance holding back the 47%.
Malaysians have to undergo a personal internal reformation. Pakatan Rakyat
holding more public rallies and giving speeches will come to naught if Malaysians
are unable to make this internal reform. This is the key factor. We have to make
this change in order to touch the hearts of those UMNO are holding in their grasp.

Lip-service and fine cosmetic words cannot do it. We
must remember “out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks”, means that
not only our words but our attitudes toward each other must come from our
genuine heart-felt feelings. All the talk of wanting our country to change will
not happen if our emotions and feelings toward another of a different race are
not changed. The most effective and lasting change in racial politics can only
take place when we reform in our hearts. It is not our mind that so much needs
to change as our heart, to excise the prejudgment, preconceived notions and
predisposition we have of another race. There must be a paradigm shift in us.
This type of change emerges from an understanding and practice of genuine
justice.

Genuine justice is based on fairness. John Rawls in
his book “A Theory of Justice” advocated distributive justice to compensate for
social and economic inequalities. Thus genuine justice is based on need. Racism
on the other hand is nothing but the systemic indifference justified by
biological or cultural differences. Since people’s needs differ due to
differing socio-historical circumstances, true justice spring from what they
need. Oliver Wendell Homes said:

“There
is no greater inequality than the equal treatment of unequals”

At the heart of justice is affirmative action based
on need. It is based on the principle of redress that undeserved inequalities
call for rectification. Since inequalities of birth are undeserved these
inequalities must be compensated for. Therefore in order to treat all persons
equally and provide genuine equality of opportunity, society must give more
attention to those born into or placed in less favourable social-economic
positions. It cannot be based on discredited and debunked notions of racial
supremacy or inferiority. It is only when Malaysians can get to this point will
Malaysia be able to change.

To get to this point requires compassion. Compassion
is the counter to racism. At the heart of compassion lies “respect” the process
whereby the other person is treated with deference, courtesy and compassion in
an endeavour to safeguard the integrity, dignity, value and social worth of the
individual. It means treating people they way they want to be treated.

To counter UMNO’s racial politics, Malaysians have
to find the compassion to reach out to the less fortunate Malays and Bumiputras
especially those in the rural areas and in the interior of Sabah and Sarawak.
The best way to unmask the racial lies and clean up bigotry is to show Malaysia
is a caring society assisting all irrespective of race or religion. I commend
the Rotary Club of Petaling Jaya in organizing a health clinic in Batu Arang
village where all residents in need irrespective of race were given free health,
dental and eye sight tests. If more follow this example, Malaysians’ long walk to
freedom will be one more step closer to its destination.

1 comment:

The closest that i've read that comes to the heart of all matters in this land. The very fact those who need to understand and accept it the most can't and won't will soon enough return to exact a price on this nation too high to be paid by future generations who on finding it so will move on which will then attenuate the very last fabric of our common society. A pity; we had such a good country to begin with.

About Me

William Leong is the Chief for Bureau Local Government of People’s Justice Party. In the 12th and 13th General Election ,William won the Parliamentary seat in Selayang, Selangor. He is also a Member of Parliamentary Accountability Committee(PAC).